From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6] ns16550: Add support for UART present in
 Broadcom TruManage capable NetXtreme chips
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 10:37:16 -0600
Message-ID: <529E08BC.20508@amd.com>
References: <1386009120-2454-1-git-send-email-Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
	<529DBE8A0200007800109420@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com>) id 1VnsyT-0004VG-Mh
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:37:25 +0000
In-Reply-To: <529DBE8A0200007800109420@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>, sherry.hurwitz@amd.com, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, shurd@broadcom.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 12/3/2013 4:20 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 02.12.13 at 19:32, Aravind Gopalakrishnan <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com> wrote:
>> @@ -434,7 +477,21 @@ static void __init ns16550_endboot(struct serial_port *port)
>>       struct ns16550 *uart = port->uart;
>>   
>>       if ( uart->remapped_io_base )
>> +    {
>> +        if ( uart->enable_ro ) {
>> +            if ( rangeset_add_range(mmio_ro_ranges,
>> +                                    uart->io_base,
>> +                                    uart->io_base + uart->io_size - 1) )
>> +               WARN();
>> +
>> +            if ( pci_ro_device(0, uart->ps_bdf[0],
>> +                               PCI_DEVFN(uart->ps_bdf[1], uart->ps_bdf[2])) )
>> +                WARN();
>> +
> Stray blank line.
>
> Also, for neither of the two WARN()s above the resulting stack trace
> is really meaningful. A simple printk() would therefore suffice.
> But, more importantly, did you overlook the use of pci_hide_device()
> in ns16550_init_postirq(): The hiding should be done in one place.
> And with pci_ro_device() implicitly hiding the device, you should
> probably make sure you call just one of the two.

Yes, fixed this...

>> +                        /*
>> +                         * Set enable_ro flag to 1 to
>> +                         * make device and MMIO region read only
>> +                         */
>> +                        uart->enable_ro = 1;
>> +                        break;
> So in the comment with the field declaration you say this is
> optional, as if the user had a choice. Since the selection is made
> internally, I don't think you should comment it that way.

Ok, I have reworded this in V7.

> Furthermore, with the way you use it the field should clearly be
> bool_t.

Fixed this.

Sending out V7.

Thanks,
-Aravind.